Search This Blog

CRITIQUE OF THE SOCIALISTS DEFENDING ISLAM

Get link

Facebook

Twitter

Pinterest

Email

Other Apps

CRITIQUE OF THE SOCIALISTS DEFENDING ISLAM

''The
criticism of religion is the prerequisite of all critique.'' Karl Marx

To take sides with Islamists in the name of
democracy, to support the existence of Islamic sharia is to maintain its
objectives to organize, strengthen and take power which, in case it succeeds,
due to its intrinsic structure, due to the theology of Islam, will take all of
your freedom from you, hang, imprison and exile. Just like what happened after
the ''Islamic Revolution''.

Islam in itself is the enemy of democracy and
freedom. You can see the concrete examples in countless incidents happening
everyday in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Somali and Nigeria.
Never be deceived by the ignorant persons who tell you that ''It's not what
Islam really is'', because Islam is precisely that. The Islamic law sees stone
to death, homophobia, cutting hand as punishment, pedophilia, women who have
been taken prisoners as war booty being sex slaves, woman being a second rate
person who solely exists to serve her husband as a commodity, necrophilia being
legitimized based on Muhammad's ''lying next to one of his wives'' which
implies that he raped the corpse, defending the right to have sexual
intercourse within 6 hours from the moment of death based on the acts of
Muhammad considered as ''tradition'', to kill the ones who it labels as
''heretic'', rape their women, extort their property and land as it's right and
duty; so anyway you cut it, Islam is a crime against humanity. And crime has
nothing to do with freedom.

Islam, which reserves in its heart the
potential for massacre, rape and the instigation of extort, must be prohibited,
and its propagandists should be put on trial within the context of
contradicting human rights and crimes committed against humanity.

Nevertheless, there are socialists
unfortunately taking sides with the Islamists in the name of democracy. Even though
the position of the ''Libertarian Left'' is a political structure that i agree
with most of the time, which seizes upon the attitude of defending the struggle
of sexual and ethnical minorities in conjunction with class struggle as a
''must be'', I tend to stay away from it to avoid the negligence of those who
support the Islamists in the name of democracy.

However, the analysis of both Lenin and Marx
are erroneous because of the lack of proper assessment. Because; their
predicating solely on Christianity in their analysis on religion, in order to
develop an attitude against while defending the internationalist class
struggle, is a great deficiency.

In the Communist Manifesto, they adopt a
particular attitude towards religion in line with their analysis solely based
on the ''church''.

Although Marx's phrase ''religion is the
opiate of the masses’’ is popular (opium was used as a medicine to obtund and
cure the pain caused by diseases) the part at the beginning of the same
sentence is commonly skipped. When Marx was saying, ''Religion is the sigh of the oppressed
creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless
conditions.'', he was interpreting religion only through Christian theology
which commanded ''If someone slaps you on one cheek, offer the other cheek
also'' and he was goinginto the effort
of showing ''empathy'' with the religion which he saw as a medicine that eased
the pain of the uneducated masses, but not with Islam which had inhuman rules commanding women to
be killed by being stoned to death, defending pedophilia-necrophilia, seeing it
as a right to kill the ones who are not Muslim;because he knew nothing about the theological essence of Islam, he never
considered itnecessary to make any
research on the subject, while calling the proletariat in every country to be organized.
Unfortunately, Marx who said ''The
criticism of religion is the prerequisite of all critique.'' haven't criticized
''all religion'' and thereby adopted a deficient and wrong attitude towards
religion. Without any doubt, those who follow Marx blindly continue to repeat
the same mistakes he did.

''Religion must be declared a private
affair. In these words socialists usually express their attitude towards
religion. But the meaning of these words should be accurately defined to
prevent any misunderstanding. We demand that religion be held a private affair
so far as the state is concerned. But by no means can we consider religion a
private affair so far as our Party is concerned.'' says Lenin. If you talk like Lenin, observing
religion through Christianity which its existence for the masses didn't pose
any threat of a ''nation of Islamic sharia'' to be built within a period of
struggles for reformation throughout hundreds of years and subsequentlya period of development of rationality,
science, art and philosophy without restraint, and without making a proper
research on the theology of Islam, certainly you fall into carelessness as the
atheist socialists had to have the right attitude against religion. So you say
''We demand that
religion be held a private affair so far as the state is concerned.'' just like
Lenin, but considering religions on the face of earth doesn't consist of
Christianity; no socialist state, and of course no socialist has the right to
fall into heedlessness like saying ''religion be held a private affair'' as
Islam kills, rapes, extorts the property of people who aren't Muslim in
Afghanistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia; which are the countries that haven't passed
over the ''stone age'' period yet.

To get back to the issue of
''Libertarian Left''... To support Islam in the name of democracy is no
different from being ''the stupid steer which licks the knife of the butcher'',
as you go on licking, the knife would cut your throat sooner or later...

Socialist Laz-Turk poet and author Serkan Engin was born in 1975
in Izmit, Turkey.

His poems and articles on poetry theory have appeared in more than
fifty literary journals in Turkey. In 2004, he published a poetry manifesto,
entitled Imagist Socialist Poetry. He has been trying to launch a new movement
in Turkish poetry and to this end has published numerous articles about
literary theory.

His poems and articles on poetry theory have been published in
English in many international literary journals all over the world like The
Tower Journal, Poetry'z Own, Belleville Park Pages, Far Enough East, Split
Infinitive Lit Magazine, Empty Mirror Literary Magazine, Songsoptok, Poetry
Super Highway, Miracle E-zine, Industry Night Lit Magazine, Open Road Review,
Shot Glass Journal, The Criterion, Typoetic.us, The Wagon Magazine, The Last
Bench and international literary/art sites like Mediterranean Poetry, The
Writer’s Drawer, Margutte, Shabda Shikha.

Some of his poems appeared in Japanese in the leading Japanese
philosophy and poetry journal Shi to Shisou.

His poems and articles on poetry theory also have been translated
into Italian, Spanish, Swedish, Armenian, Azerbaijani, Romanian, Persian,
Bengali, Kurdish, Romaic and Lazish.

Some of his poems in English have been accepted to the international
thematic poetry anthologies.

He is the first Turkish poet in history who has written a poem on
Armenian Genocide. His poem named "Barbarian and Ms Daisy" which has
been dedicated to the victims of the Armenian, Assyrian and Greek genocides has
been accepted into the “Armenian Poetry Project” in 2014.

His political articles on Islam and also Armenian, Assyrian, Greek
genocides have been published in many countries in many languages including
Sweden, USA, Greece, India, France, Argentina, Netherlands, Armenia, Indonesia
and Finland.

He hasn’t published any printed poetry book in Turkey because of
his ethical attitude.